abitare (33.52)

Is Matt Simmons Credible?

10

I am going to address a touchy subject in this essay, but I simply can’t ignore it any longer. I have noticed that a lot of people are finding my blog through keyword searches of “Debunking Matt Simmons.” About two and a half years ago, I did write an essay called Debunking Matt Simmons. Because of Matt’s recent claims about the disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, there has been a spike in interest over whether his claims related to the disaster are actually credible. So now seems like a good time to revisit the subject.

Claims like "BP will file for Chapter 11 by July 9," and that "the 'real, untold story' is another leak that is 5-7 miles away spewing 120,000 barrels per day" are ruining Matt Simmons' credibility.

The topic is touchy because Matt Simmons has long been revered in the energy business, and some of his fans will be upset with me for writing this.

No. He thinks the blowout preventer was blown miles away from the wellhead, and that the video from the ROVs is showing light oil and gas condensates coming from the pipes leading to the sunken Deepwater Horizon. It's a ridiculous claim. It's still not clear to me why the 120K barrels he says are actually leaking would not float, either. This is his swan song in serious company, and that article is just nail in his reputation's coffin.

OK, with so many wild stories, let's look at all the facts. Here are four possible senerios and what facts would prove or disprove them:

1) Blow out blew out the BOP and sent it far away from the original wellbore. The TV BOP may also be just a portion of the original BOP. It could be attached to the bottom with the blown out casing and attached to the top by the riser (that was bent over).

2) Current BP TV feed is really from a different well and is being staged (not the real wellbore that blew out).

3) BP TV feed really is the real BOP and did not move. The casing is in the hole and there will be no problem at all for the relief wells (or now the new top kill) to permanently kill the well.

4) We do not have the actual timeline of events. Perhaps there was a problem before and the wellbore we see is a second (or third) wellbore.

How to prove or disprove above scenarios:

1) GPS data - the data will show where the actual wellbore is and the robots would be able to confirm it (assume no manipulation of data). Should be able to see the casing running to the BOP (the TJ reported that there were two pipes next to each other. This would seem right for this scenieo.

2) GPS data would not match. There should also be BOP manufacturing data (numbers and drawings) that can be used to confirm the origin of the BOP. A simple calculation using the ID of the BOP flange and how fast the fluid is moving could tell that it is not 80,000+ barrels per day but far less.

3) GPS data would match perfectly. Casing would be in place and the relief well will be able to kill the well. No further oil will show up at the surface. Things should get better daily.

4) GPS data would not match. Company records, work records, etc. would show major inconsistancies.

Thus, it looks like GPS data is critical to the investigation. We need those locations from the government AND BP AND from an independent company. We need an independent investigation for everything. I will be interested in reading that report (or book).

Matt is way out on on a line with this one. I hope he is wrong but things do not smell right. Americans deserve a full, independent report.